IPv6 PI allocation

[Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0]

> >> RFC3178-style multihoming will create more entries in the global 
> >> routing table once a network using that connects to an IXP.
> 
> * itojun at itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0) [Thu 17 May 2007, 19:36 CEST]:
> >not at all.  RFC3178 does not require ISPs to announce any specific 
> >routes (other than /29 or /32 of the ISP).
> 
> RFC3178 exists in some kind of fantasy world.  Quoting from it, "3. 
> Basic mechanism": "We assume that our site is connected to 2 ISPs, ISP-A 
> and ISP-B."
> 
> This is an unrealistic requirement for the reasons I spelled out (the 
> need to connect to an IXP,

	no need to connect to any of IXes (by IXP you mean Internet eXchange
	Points - am I right?).

> plus the need for independence from any ISP's 
> network

	this is not fullfilled by RFC3178, that's true.  see below.

> - you cannot withdraw an announcement from a particular broken 
> upstream except by pulling all DNS records).

	you can workaround this with RFC3178.  the assumption is that ISP-A
	and ISP-B are having transit relationship with each other, that's all.

itojun